Bmblbzzz wrote:Ok, so we have to vote for four or none at all. Do we have a thread for discussion of the various merits and demerits of the candidates? Particularly but not only from the pov of the "specific qualities" the Board are looking for.
Good idea but do we have enough information to go on.
My take on this is that there are three candidates that I would like to vote for - two of whom are already favoured by the 'committee'. I don't know any of them, but what little I do know about them suggests to me that they'll be an asset, and worthy of our votes. They are also the longest serving CTC/CUK members and I'm sure didn't join the 'Club' (as it was when they joined) with a view to joining the hierarchy.
That leaves five other candidates, two of whom are 'endorsed' (favoured) by the committee. These are the two candidates who have the shortest membership terms - 2 years and one year - which makes me think that their applications for membership were at the instigation of the 'committee', or the board of trustees, for their own reasons - I think that the term may be 'Head Hunted'. I just can't bring myself to think that those reasons are cycling related.
If I vote for four candidates, than my fourth vote will go to the fourth longest serving member, who is not endorsed by the 'committee'.
My guess is that two of my votes will be wasted, because the four endorsed candidates will be elected anyway.
That's just my take on this situation - being forced to place a fourth vote to make my three votes valid is, to me, unethical and downright wrong. This is not to be taken as suggesting that there is anything wrong, or unacceptable, or of lack of competence, or unsuitable about any of the other candidates, I'm sure that they're good, decent able folk and with positive intentions (although I do worry about short membership terms and then seeking office). It is simply because conditions imposed on my right to vote are in my view wrongful.
I think it's time for me to shut up now - these are only my views, and the situation may very well be the same in other organisations - but it wasn't the situation in the dear, departed and loved (by me, at any rate) CTC.